Our BR Diary, from start to finish......

fiveyearplan

ps - just went to check mine and it still has my OR's address on it.:mad:

december

ooh mine says RTLU Midlands too Scarlett

December

MammaCas

Scarlett, so pleased things are moving on :j :j

And def. pleased that it may seem that no BRU/BRO for H

MC x

Scarlett.1974

Afternoon all,

So, we're 6 and a half months through now. Went BR in Feb, had phone interviews at the beginning of March. IPA was discussed but hasn't materialised (yet). Had some contact from the OR since, asking for more information, which we provided immediately. We have fully co-operated with him 100% from day 1.

Noticed on the IS site a couple of weeks ago that we've both been transferred to RTLU Not had anything confirming this in writing yet though. I was lead to understand that this was a Good Thing, that the OR was finished with his investigations and things were progressing in the right direction.

Then this morning....... *bombshell*. We've both received letters saying we have to attend a face to face interview at the OR's office in Birmingham. Not even together..... H's is next Friday and mine is the following Monday. I am, not to put too fine a point on it, very upset worried and confused

It says absolutely nothing in the letters as to WHY we're being called in for these interviews, not a word. H seems to think they're a mistake, an admin error...... but does the OR/IS make these sort of mistakes? I'm guessing probably not. What's got him thinking this is the fact, like I've said above, that according to the IS site we've been transferred to RTLU - surely they wouldn't do this if there were further investigations needed?

I'm not quite sure what I'm expecting in way of replies to be honest, but I'm in bits here now. Feel sick with worry

It doesn't make sense? Why now, after all this time? Why now, when we appear to have been transferred? Why an interview? He (the OR) has asked us for further information on certain matters, which we've supplied without hesitation. I appreciate I'm asking impossible to answer questions and won't know anything until we can call the OR's office on Monday. But one last question - why do these things always seem (to me anyway) to come on a Saturday when you can't do anything about it, but worry all weekend

Thanks to anyone who can offer any advice or help.

mysterio_2

could be something as simple as a new OR looking at the case that wants bringing up to speed..could be they need more information

maxmycardagain

how complicated was yr BR? were properties involved, any large pre-BR spending? expensive cars to haggle over, equity? etc?

yr BR's were individual, hence the two interviews, but you should be able to go in together

worry if you hear "under caution" mentioned...if it IS mentioned, decline the interview unless you can have legal representation...

blind-as-a-bat_2

transfered to the RTLU usually does mean the OR has concluded there investigations, but if something should come to light they can re open it, maybe acreditor has said something, though this is rare

Try ringing the OR and asking because they can and do make mistakes.....frequently.....due to the work load.

I dont think it is unreasonable to ask what it is about though so you can prepare the info they may be after.

I have only seen one post where this had happened and it was nothing sinister though so try not to worry

Scarlett.1974

Mysterio - the letter is from our original OR so I don't think it's the case of a new one wanting to go over it.

Max - thanks, I think <gulp>. I think our BR was pretty straight-forward - no business, no equity in the house (currently being repo'd, it's in huge negative equity), no excessive BR spending. We hadn't used our CCs or ODs for about 5 months prior to BR. H's car was on a HP agreement and they reclaimed that about 2 weeks after BR, even though he'd kept those payments up to date - it was a clause of the agreement apparently. We've bought an old banger since (£900). A large % of H's debt was due to poker - however, the OR knows ALL about this, like I said earlier, we've been 100% honest from day 1. He contacted H about 3 months ago, by letter, wanting to know about all his poker websites, usernames & passwords etc..... which H immediately supplied him with. We've made (financial) mistakes of course, but I don't see anything that we've done to justify the need for face to face interviews.

Scarlett.1974

blind-as-a-bat wrote: »

transfered to the RTLU usually does mean the OR has concluded there investigations, but if something should come to light they can re open it, maybe acreditor has said something, though this is rare

Try ringing the OR and asking because they can and do make mistakes.....frequently.....due to the work load.

I dont think it is unreasonable to ask what it is about though so you can prepare the info they may be after.

I have only seen one post where this had happened and it was nothing sinister though so try not to worry

Thanks BAAB Definitely going to be calling him on Monday morning. Did try this morning, but of course, they're closed on a Saturday.

I really don't want to get my hopes up, but do think it possibly could be a mistake?

storminbalder

Scarlett.

The same happened to me. A small proportion of my debts were due to gambling. I was summoned for a second interview to discuss this. The difference is though, that the letter specified this as the reason for further enquiry. I too had been totally open and honest.

The interview was a blessing though as I was told that the OR was unlikely to give me a BRU/BRO as it "was not in the public interest" as he agreed with my figures that the gambling only contributed to 4% of my debts. Furthermore I discovered I was allowed to keep the car.

In other words it won't necessarily be an unpleasant experience. I was much happier as a result of the interview. The worst that can happen is the BRU/BRO situation, which as I'm sure you have read elsewhere, is not something to panic about.

It doesn't explain why both of you have been summoned however, as it was only your husband who gambled.

I agree with posters above. You should have been told why the interview is necessary (I was), and it is entirely reasonable on your part to enquire why.